Today, the Southeastern Conference (SEC) is expected to release a final version of its new media policy. For the sake of sports fans everywhere, let’s hope it has some significant changes from the current version, because at the moment, it can best be described as a ban on all social media usage at SEC games.

Earlier this month, the conference informed its schools of the new policy, which reads: “Ticketed fans can’t “produce or disseminate (or aid in producing or disseminating) any material or information about the Event, including, but not limited to, any account, description, picture, video, audio, reproduction or other information concerning the Event.”

Translated, that means no Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, TwitPic, or any other service that could in any way compete with authorized media coverage of the event. In the case of the SEC, authorized media coverage rights belong to CBS, who has a $3 billion deal with the conference over the next 15 years according to The St Petersburg Times.

I don't go to games, but this is an interesting development if they keep this policy in place.

This is an odd move. As a student in this conference for 5 years and a lifetime fan, I have been to many games. I have just recently started using texts to twitter. Although the thought of tweeting a game had not occurred, I have texted friends throughout games. Twitter would just be another dynamic to this. The people that follow me and care would most likely be tuned in anyway so I believe I agree with the mention of counter-productivity the article mentions.

problems with enforcement aside, it's interesting that they're not limiting this to audio & video. Because of course, you don't have to be at the venue to do text play by play online. Real time game threads are a standard practice of every sports forum. That kind of thing helps them more than it hurts because it makes people want to be there -- or at least, be able to watch it on tv or online. Banning twittering at the stadium, even if they could, doesn't help them.

They are soon going to have a bit of a problem with video, though. Aggregate a bunch of fans taking short clips with their phones and soon you could have an interesting alternative to the official broadcast.

Banning twittering at the stadium, even if they could, doesn't help them.

Plus, how does a tweet such as, "Shit, that was a sweet shot!I totally got a boner from that, lulz" (hypothetical) step on CBS' toes? This is a corporation saying they own every aspect of an event, including the expressions of emotional responses to that event. I can't get my head around that. Banning all information leakage from a stadium to ensure that there is only one available outlet is alarming.

Translated, that means no Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, TwitPic, or any other service that could in any way compete with authorized media coverage of the event.

No way anyone will get around that. In other news, people stop smoking pot at concerts, illegal music and movie downloads end for good, and Kim Jong Il completely denuclearizes North Korea out of good will.

Yeah it do! Um, having control over distribution of information ensures advertiser revenue. The internet kills that control for newspapers, evaporating their revenue. Dispersed live micro-video would kill that control for the Sports-Industrial complex. In the case of newspapers, that same revenue is necessary for cogently disseminating that information, and that's an issue with the future of news. In the case of Sports, that revenue is necessary to construct the situations wherein a bunch of stupid fucking numbers have any relevance to anybody in the first place. No ads means no stadiums. Bring that shit on, yes plz.

Unlike newspapers, unfortunately, Sports information does belong to the people who create it, and broadcast rights give stadiums plenty of permission to ban tweets or live video or whatever -- the real question is, since obviously they can't stop texts and it doesn't fucking matter anyway, if technology will make instant-bootleg video that is discreet, sufficiently quality, and distributable without being traced to "servers" (I don't understand servers). Then, it's on. One can hope. Fucking professional sports. Waste of money. [sentence removed :)]

*Edit: of course, we're talking about College Stadiums here. It's not an issue for Pro Sports until the video thing I said. But when Fall comes I'm going to have my WPRB.com broadcasts interrupted by fucking Uhmmercan Footbal every other day, and I fucking DONATE to that station, so tweet away, tweeters.

Plus, how does a tweet such as, "Shit, that was a sweet shot!I totally got a boner from that, lulz" (hypothetical) step on CBS' toes?

One issue becomes what constitutes a broadcast -- if you ever look at what espn.com (and others) do with gamecasts, they build up a nice depiction of what's going on in the game merely from real-time text play by play and visual depiction of raw information. I presume they're paying for the right to do that, at least as part of their overall agreements with various college conferences and pro leagues.

No way anyone will get around that. In other news, people stop smoking pot at concerts, illegal music and movie downloads end for good, and Kim Jong Il completely denuclearizes North Korea out of good will.

Right, although it could merely be a move to help prevent the scout.com and rivals.com's of the world from aggregating and using that to build live game "broadcasts" without paying for it.

So is this ALL social media?If you happen to be texting your friends on the other side of the stadium, asking them where they'd like to eat after the game, is a security guard just going to haul you out? If you're "caught", is anyone going to even ask what you're doing? Or, as the wording scares me into believing, are they going to try to follow every bit of social media back to the person who sent it and send them a notice? If I didn't think would fail horribly, I'd start worrying about how this kind of mentality is going to reach my Twitter feed.

@Mark Seifert, that's interesting. As I don't follow sports (I'm with BrianMowrey on this one) I didn't know about gamecasts. However, that's a very dedicated way of disseminating information about the game. My thought was that unless you follow the tweets of a lot of people at a game, you're not going to get the same kind of info-dump as a sports journalist interpreting what's happening on the pitch. Or field. Or whatever it's called.

I guess this is why I think the whole thing is worrying. CBS are maintaining a copyright over not just broadcast of the game, but all information pertaining to the game and what happens within the walls of the stadium, be it tweets about certain plays, or texts from family member to family member taunting each other over final scores. Thin end of the wedge etc. etc.

One can hope. Fucking professional sports. Waste of money. Supply-side modern wasteful consumerism future doom constuct bullshit. AND FUCKING BORING.

First, what does "future doom construct bullshit" even mean? Are you referring to college football? Because I think you're giving it a little more credit than it deserves...unless you're talking about Mutant League Football (what a great game).

Second, I disagree with your whole argument, and so do a shit load of others. There are a lot of people out there that think the same way you do of libraries (waste of space and money). There are a ton of people who think the same of print media. Sports create the same entertainment release as movies, books, art, etc... I hate to use this phrase because it's so fucking hackneyed, but be more open minded. Just because it ain't your cup of tea doesn't mean it's worthless. People need fun or life just blows, and fun doesn't have to fit such narrow definitions to be worthy of existance.

you know how we (people that DO like some sports) joke about that disclaimer at the end of games "all accounts or retelling of the game are strictly prohibited" meaning that we cant even legally talk about the game?

i think this is them flexing that muscle a little. and fuck them for trying.

My thought was that unless you follow the tweets of a lot of people at a game, you're not going to get the same kind of info-dump as a sports journalist interpreting what's happening on the pitch.

I think maybe they're trying to head off something off that's coming a couple moves down the road. 80k people at the stadium, 0.1% of them decide to twitter using the hashtag #USCvOSU, suddenly you've got something interesting, possibly BETTER than what the sports journalist is doing.

The spectacle of professional sports and stadiums and the consumerism/trade/commerce associated with them are nothing new and will never disappear. Although I'm not a fan of professional sports and I despise the bloated wealth and corruption associated with it, I will still gather with friends and watch some college basketball.And regardless of my personal distaste for their extravagance, I know large scale sports complexes and events are actually key to communities. They're one of many things that provides a sense of cultural identity. That's evident throughout the larger organized urban civilizations of history up to the present day: Mayan Ball Courts, the Roman Colosseum, Chicago's Soldier Field.

Sports are events of local economy and community ritual that will always persist in one form or another...the gathering of large numbers of spectators to cheer and/or jeer a competitive event which in turn attracts the attention of large numbers of merchants and vendors, etc.

Regarding the initial story though: the SEC thinking they can control or outlaw Twittering etc at such events is absurd. These folks either need to figure out how to roll with it or be left behind.

But yes, some of them are quite boring.Personally, I'm ready for Death Race 2000.

EDIT 40 however I will brighten the tone of those comments so the thread doesn't get eeled.

---

Edit 2 @ steven thomas

The spectacle of professional sports and stadiums and the consumerism/trade/commerce associated with them are nothing new and will never disappear.

Lamentably, you are right. But society benefits from spending less money on historical needs. Like how much less of our effort goes into food since Roman times. So I would like sports to hold to that same standard. Stop costing so much fucking money to give people the same amount of diversion they used to get from a one dollar trip to the stadium or what the fuck ever it used to be. I mean, do you know how much NFL season tickets cost? And they don't come with blowjobs.

I made a joke on here recently about how Twitter was shut down by Paramount to stop people tweeting about how bad G.I. Joe was the day before its proper opening day, but I guess that's the worst case scenario. Shutting down non-sanctioned blogging or tweeting about movies.

@Mark Seifert, I can see that working, but I think most fans are going to go with CBS' "official" viewpoint, with the other as a supplementary take. Do you have to pay to read gamecasts? If not, then there's no revenue lost. If so, then I can see why they would do it, even though I hate the idea of it.

I guess Twitter has established itself enough now that corporations are going to figure out any way in which it can be used to take eyeballs off their product and then shut it down any way they can.